Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations is/are: “part”, “module” in claims 1-20.
Because this/these claim limitations is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-11 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yudovsky; Joseph et al. (US 20130143415 A1). Yudovsky teaches an atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]), comprising: a source gas supply part (804a, 804b; 904a; “first RX gas (A)”, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5) that supplies a plurality of source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9); a source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) connected to the source gas supply part (804a, 804b; 904a; “first RX gas (A)”, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5); a reaction gas supply part (A-E; 804a, 804b; 904a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s RSP; Figure 7) that supplies a reaction gas (A,B; 804a, 804b; 904a; [0054]-Figure 9); a reaction gas supply module (30/31/33; Figure 4A- ”each injector unit 31”-[0050]Applicant’s RGM; Figure 4,7) connected to the reaction gas supply part (A-E; 804a, 804b; 904a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s RSP; Figure 7) and spaced apart from the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) in a first direction (left/right direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR1; Figure 4,5); and a first purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 804a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7) disposed between the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) and the reaction gas supply module (30/31/33; Figure 4A- ”each injector unit 31”-[0050]Applicant’s RGM; Figure 4,7) in the first direction (left/right direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR1; Figure 4,5), wherein the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) comprises a plurality of gas injection holes (32; Figure 4A; [0050]) arranged in a second direction (depth direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR2; Figure 5) perpendicular to the first direction (left/right direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR1; Figure 4,5), as claimed by claim 1. The above and below italicized claim text denotes intended use claim requirements for the pending apparatus claims. For example, the reactivity of a gas does not further limit the structure for the pending apparatus claims. Further, it has been held that claim language that simply specifies an intended use or field of use for the invention generally will not limit the scope of a claim (Walter , 618 F.2d at 769, 205 USPQ at 409; MPEP 2106). Additionally, in apparatus claims, intended use must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim (In re Casey,152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto , 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); MPEP2115).
Yudovsky further teaches:
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 1, wherein the source gas supply part (804a, 804b; 904a; “first RX gas (A)”, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5) includes: a first source gas (A; Figure 9) supply part (904a; “first RX gas (A)”; Figure 9) that supplies a first source gas (A; Figure 9); a second source gas (B; Figure 9) supply part (804a, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]) that supplies a second source gas (B; Figure 9); and a third source gas (D; Figure 9) supply part (804b, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5) that supplies a third source gas (D; Figure 9), as claimed by claim 2
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 2, wherein the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) includes: a plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) connected to the first source gas (A; Figure 9) supply part (904a; “first RX gas (A)”; Figure 9); a plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) connected to the second source gas (B; Figure 9) supply part (804a, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]); and a plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) connected to the third source gas (D; Figure 9) supply part (804b, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5), as claimed by claim 3
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 3, wherein one of the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), one of the plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), and one of the plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) are repeatedly arranged in sequence (Figure 9), as claimed by claim 4
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 3, further comprising: a first valve (first valve for “A”; Figure 9) that connects the first source gas (A; Figure 9) supply part (904a; “first RX gas (A)”; Figure 9) to the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) and controls a supply of the first source gas (A; Figure 9); a second valve (806 second valve for “B”; Figure 9) that connects the second source gas (B; Figure 9) supply part (804a, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]) to the plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) and controls a supply of the second source gas (B; Figure 9); and a third valve (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9) that connects the third source gas (D; Figure 9) supply part (804b, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5) to the plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) and controls a supply of the third source gas (D; Figure 9), wherein the first, second, and third valves (valves; Figure 9-Applicant’s VALx; Figure 5) are sequentially opened, as claimed by claim 5
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 5, wherein each of the first, second, and third valves (valves; Figure 9-Applicant’s VALx; Figure 5) includes a first valve part (first valve for “A”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU1; Figure 6) , a second valve part (806 second valve for “B”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU2; Figure 6) , a third valve part (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU3; Figure 6) , and a fourth valve part ( 806 for third valve for “purge”), an end of the first valve part (first valve for “A”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU1; Figure 6) and an end of the second valve part (806 second valve for “B”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU2; Figure 6) are connected to a corresponding one of the first, second, and third source gas (A,B,D; Figure 9) supply parts (904A,804a,804b, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5), another end of the second valve part (806 second valve for “B”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU2; Figure 6) is connected to an end of the third valve part (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU3; Figure 6) , another end of the first valve part (first valve for “A”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU1; Figure 6) is connected to another end of the third valve part (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU3; Figure 6) , the fourth valve part ( 806 for third valve for “purge”) is supplied with a carrier gas and is connected to the end of the third valve part (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU3; Figure 6) , and the another end of the third valve part (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU3; Figure 6) is connected to a corresponding one of the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), the plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), and the plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), as claimed by claim 6
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 6, wherein the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) receives and supplies the first, second, and third source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9) to a substrate (61; Figure 1), the reaction gas supply module (30/31/33; Figure 4A- ”each injector unit 31”-[0050]Applicant’s RGM; Figure 4,7) receives and supplies the reaction gas (A,B; 804a, 804b; 904a; [0054]-Figure 9) to the substrate (61; Figure 1), the first purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 804a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7) supplies a purge gas to the substrate (61; Figure 1), in case that the first, second, and third source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9) are supplied, the first, second, and fourth valve parts (806; Figure 9) are opened and the third valve part (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU3; Figure 6) is closed, and in case that supplies of the first, second, and third source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9) are interrupted, the first and second valve part (806 second valve for “B”; Figure 9-Applicant’s VU2; Figure 6) s are closed and the third and fourth valve parts (806; Figure 9) are opened, as claimed by claim 7
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 6, further comprising: a carrier gas supply part (“purge” for 904a,804a,b; Figure 9) that supplies the carrier gas, as claimed by claim 8
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 1, further comprising: a second purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 804b; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7) and a third purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 904a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7), wherein the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) is disposed between the first purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 804a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7) and the second purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 804b; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7), and the reaction gas supply module (30/31/33; Figure 4A- ”each injector unit 31”-[0050]Applicant’s RGM; Figure 4,7) is disposed between the first purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 804a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7) and the third purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 904a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7), as claimed by claim 9. The claimed “disposed between” clause is interpreted by the Examiner as having Applicant’s nozzles “RNZ” in the claimed relative position for the claimed gas supply module. Further, the claimed relative positions are noted to be met by Yudovsky’s valve open/closed states in Figure 9 meeting the claimed requirements. Applicant has not provided sufficient distinguishing structural characteristics of Applicant's claimed invention to contrast the Examiner's cited prior art. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Examiner notes MPEP 2112 which states the express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 1, wherein exhaust hole (“holes”; throughout; [0050])s (“pump”; Figure 9-Applicant’s EXH; Figure 9) are defined between the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) and the first purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 804a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7) and between the reaction gas supply module (30/31/33; Figure 4A- ”each injector unit 31”-[0050]Applicant’s RGM; Figure 4,7) and the first purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 804a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7), as claimed by claim 10. As above, the claimed “disposed between” clause is interpreted by the Examiner as having Applicant’s nozzles “RNZ” in the claimed relative position for the claimed gas supply module. Further, the claimed relative positions are noted to be met by Yudovsky’s valve open/closed states in Figure 9 meeting the claimed requirements. Applicant has not provided sufficient distinguishing structural characteristics of Applicant's claimed invention to contrast the Examiner's cited prior art. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Examiner notes MPEP 2112 which states the express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 10, further comprising: a pumping module (150; Figure 1,9) connected to the exhaust hole (“holes”; throughout; [0050])s (“pump”; Figure 9-Applicant’s EXH; Figure 9) and providing an exhaust pressure to the exhaust hole (“holes”; throughout; [0050])s (“pump”; Figure 9-Applicant’s EXH; Figure 9), as claimed by claim 11
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 1, wherein the plurality of source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9) are mixed in the source gas supply part (804a, 804b; 904a; “first RX gas (A)”, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5) and are supplied to the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7), as claimed by claim 16. Yudovsky can accomplish the claimed mixing by all, or the required number of Yudovsky’s valves of Figure 9 being open or in such a state as to accomplish the claimed use. Applicant has not provided sufficient distinguishing structural characteristics of Applicant's claimed invention to contrast the Examiner's cited prior art. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Examiner notes MPEP 2112 which states the express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 16, wherein the plurality of source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9) are mixed at different ratios, as claimed by claim 17. Yudovsky can accomplish the claimed mixing by all, or the required number of Yudovsky’s valves of Figure 9 being open or in such a state as to accomplish the claimed use. Applicant has not provided sufficient distinguishing structural characteristics of Applicant's claimed invention to contrast the Examiner's cited prior art. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Examiner notes MPEP 2112 which states the express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
An atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]), comprising: a first source gas (A; Figure 9) supply part (904a; “first RX gas (A)”; Figure 9) that supplies a first source gas (A; Figure 9); a second source gas (B; Figure 9) supply part (804a, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]) that supplies a second source gas (B; Figure 9); a third source gas (D; Figure 9) supply part (804b, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5) that supplies a third source gas (D; Figure 9); a source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) connected to the first, second, and third source gas (A,B,D; Figure 9) supply parts (904A,804a,804b, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5); a first valve (first valve for “A”; Figure 9) that connects the first source gas (A; Figure 9) supply part (904a; “first RX gas (A)”; Figure 9) to the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) and controls a supply of the first source gas (A; Figure 9); a second valve (806 second valve for “B”; Figure 9) that connects the second source gas (B; Figure 9) supply part (804a, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]) to the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) and controls a supply of the second source gas (B; Figure 9); a third valve (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9) that connects the third source gas (D; Figure 9) supply part (804b, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5) to the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) and controls a supply of the third source gas (D; Figure 9); a reaction gas supply part (A-E; 804a, 804b; 904a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s RSP; Figure 7) that supplies a reaction gas (A,B; 804a, 804b; 904a; [0054]-Figure 9); a reaction gas supply module (30/31/33; Figure 4A- ”each injector unit 31”-[0050]Applicant’s RGM; Figure 4,7) connected to the reaction gas supply part (A-E; 804a, 804b; 904a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s RSP; Figure 7) and spaced apart from the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) in a first direction (left/right direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR1; Figure 4,5); and a first purge gas supply module (“Purge” for 804a; [0054]-Figure 9-Applicant’s PGMx; Figure 7) disposed between the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) and the reaction gas supply module (30/31/33; Figure 4A- ”each injector unit 31”-[0050]Applicant’s RGM; Figure 4,7) in the first direction (left/right direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR1; Figure 4,5), wherein the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) comprises a plurality of gas injection holes (32; Figure 4A; [0050]) arranged in a second direction (depth direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR2; Figure 5) perpendicular to the first direction (left/right direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR1; Figure 4,5), as claimed by claim 18. The claimed “disposed between” clause is interpreted by the Examiner as having Applicant’s nozzles “RNZ” in the claimed relative position for the claimed gas supply module. Further, the claimed relative positions are noted to be met by Yudovsky’s valve open/closed states in Figure 9 meeting the claimed requirements. Applicant has not provided sufficient distinguishing structural characteristics of Applicant's claimed invention to contrast the Examiner's cited prior art. When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Examiner notes MPEP 2112 which states the express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 18, wherein the first, second, and third valves (valves; Figure 9-Applicant’s VALx; Figure 5) are sequentially opened, as claimed by claim 19
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 18, wherein the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) includes: a plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) connected through the first valve (first valve for “A”; Figure 9) to the first source gas (A; Figure 9) supply part (904a; “first RX gas (A)”; Figure 9); a plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) connected through the second valve (806 second valve for “B”; Figure 9) to the second source gas (B; Figure 9) supply part (804a, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]); and a plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) connected through the third valve (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9) to the third source gas (D; Figure 9) supply part (804b, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5), as claimed by claim 20
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yudovsky; Joseph et al. (US 20130143415 A1) in view of Thie; William et al. (US 20220108875 A1). Yudovsky is discussed above. Yudovsky does not teach plumbing connections for single gas source(s) providing gas to plural first, second, and third nozzles as shown in Applicant’s Figure 18. As a result, Yudovsky does not teach:
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 3, further comprising: a first valve (first valve for “A”; Figure 9) that connects the first source gas (A; Figure 9) supply part (904a; “first RX gas (A)”; Figure 9) to the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), the plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), and the plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) and controls a supply of the first source gas (A; Figure 9); a second valve (806 second valve for “B”; Figure 9) that connects the second source gas (B; Figure 9) supply part (804a, “second gas port”, Figure 9; [0086]) to the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), the plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), and the plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) and controls a supply of the second source gas (B; Figure 9); and a third valve (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9) that connects the third source gas (D; Figure 9) supply part (804b, Figure 9; [0086]-Applicant’s SGPx; Figure 5) to the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), the plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), and the plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) and controls a supply of the third source gas (D; Figure 9), wherein the first, second, and third valves (valves; Figure 9-Applicant’s VALx; Figure 5) are sequentially opened, as claimed by claim 12
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 12, further comprising: a first flow controller connected to the first valve (first valve for “A”; Figure 9) and controlling a flow rate of the first source gas (A; Figure 9); a second flow controller connected to the second valve (806 second valve for “B”; Figure 9) and controlling a flow rate of the second source gas (B; Figure 9); a third flow controller connected to the third valve (806 for third valve for “D”; Figure 9) and controlling a flow rate of the third source gas (D; Figure 9); and a mixture part connected to the first, second, and third flow controllers and to the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), the plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), and the plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), mixing the first, second, and third source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9) that are provided from the first, second, and third flow controllers, and supplying the mixed first, second, and third source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9) to the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), the plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), and the plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), as claimed by claim 13
The atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 13, wherein the flow rates of the first, second, and third source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9) are independently controlled by the first, second, and third flow controllers, as claimed by claim 14
Thie also teaches a wafer processing apparatus (Figure 2A) including upstream plumbing and valve controller (240; Figure 2A) for delivering desired gas mixture ratios at desired locations in Thie’s showerhead.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Yudovsky to add Thie’s additional plumbing fittings and Thie’s controller as taught by Thie.
Motivation for Yudovsky to add Thie’s additional plumbing fittings and Thie’s controller as taught by Thie is for process optimizations for “for specific processes, recipes, gases and gas mixtures, etc. to achieve desired etch and deposition uniformities.” as taught by Thie ([0025]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yudovsky; Joseph et al. (US 20130143415 A1) in view of Panavalappil Kumarankutty; Hanish Kumar et al. (US 20200291522 A1). Yudovsky is discussed above. Yudovsky does not teach the atomic layer deposition apparatus (Figure 1,4,5,9; [0012]-[0014]) of claim 1, wherein the source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) includes a plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), a plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), and a plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzle, which supply different ones of the plurality of source gases (A-E,Purge; Figure 9), each of the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) includes a first source hole (“holes”; throughout; [0050]), each of the plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) includes a second source hole (“holes”; throughout; [0050]), each of the plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) includes a third source hole (“holes”; throughout; [0050]), the first source hole (“holes”; throughout; [0050]), the second source hole (“holes”; throughout; [0050]), and the third source hole (“holes”; throughout; [0050]) of neighboring ones of the plurality of first source gas (A; Figure 9) nozzles (800a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ1; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) – claim 15.
Yudovsky does not teach Yudovsky’s plurality of second source gas (B; Figure 9) nozzles (802a,b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ2; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18), and Yudovsky’s plurality of third source gas (D; Figure 9) nozzles (802b; Figure 9-Applicant’s SNZ3; Figure 5,8A,11A,14A, 18) are arranged in a diagonal direction (Applicant’s Figure 17), the diagonal direction is a direction that intersects the first direction (left/right direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR1; Figure 4,5) and a second direction (depth direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR2; Figure 5) intersecting the first direction (left/right direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR1; Figure 4,5), and Yudovsky’s source gas supply module (“gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; “each injector unit”-[0050]; 930; Figure 9-Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7) extends in the second direction (depth direction; Figure 9-Applicant’s DR2; Figure 5) – claim 17
Panavalappil Kumarankutty also teaches a wafer processing apparatus (Figure 1) including a showerhead (Figure 2A) injecting three unmixed gases (A,B,C; Figure 2G) into dedicated holes (A-211; Figure 2C; B-213; Figure 2D; C-211; Figure 2F) in a a repeating geometry (Figure 2K).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Yudovsky to arrange Yudovsky’s gas holes (“holes”; throughout; [0050]) as taught by Panavalappil Kumarankutty.
Motivation for Yudovsky to arrange Yudovsky’s gas holes (“holes”; throughout; [0050]) as taught by Panavalappil Kumarankutty is modifications based on “process requirements for the substrate” as taught by Panavalappil Kumarankutty (column 9; line 64-column 10; line 15).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 8, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states:
“
FIG. 7 depicts a cross-sectional view taken along line IlIl-Ill' of FIG. 1 (i.e., a cross- sectional view in the plane of DR3 and DR1). Additionally, as illustrated in FIG. 4, the second purge gas supply module PGM2, the source gas supply module SGM, the first purge gas supply module PGM1, the reaction gas supply module RGM, and the third purge gas supply module PGM3 are sequentially arranged in the first direction DR1. Accordingly, FIG. 7 properly depicts both the source gas supply module SGM and the reaction gas supply module RGM, which are separated by two exhaust holes EXH and the purge gas nozzle PNZ.
“
In response, the Examiner notes Applicant’s Figure 4 which better illustrates the separation of SGM and RGM by the argued EXH. This and the remaining drawing objections are withdrawn.
Applicant states:
“
As illustrated in FIG. 4 of the present application, reproduced below, the deposition module DM according to a non-limiting embodiment includes a reaction gas supply module RGM spaced apart from a source gas supply module SGM in a first direction DR1, a first purge gas supply module PGM1 disposed between the source gas supply module SGM and the reaction gas supply module RGM in the first direction DR1, and the source gas supply module SGM includes a plurality of gas injection holes SH arranged in a second direction DR2 perpendicular to the first direction DR1.
In contrast, as illustrated in FIG. 9 of Yudovsky, reproduced below, Yudovsky discloses a gas distribution plate 930 including a leading gas manifold 804b connected to a second gas port 802a, a trailing gas manifold 804b connected to a second gas port 802b, and a gas manifold 904a connected to a first RX gas (A). However, Yudovsky fails to disclose, teach, or even suggest an atomic layer deposition apparatus that includes a reaction gas supply module, a source gas supply module, and a first purge gas module arranged in a first direction in a first direction, and that the source gas supply module comprises a plurality of gas injection holes arranged in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction, as recited in amended independent claims 1 and 18.
“
In response, Applicant’s assessment of Yudovsky is only with respect to Yudovsky’s Figure 9 and not with respect to the entirety of Yudovsky. Specifically, Yudovsky’s source gas supply module is defined throughout the specification as the “gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 1,3,4,5; 930; Figure 9 (Applicant’s SGM; Figure 5,7). As a result, Yudovsky clearly shows a three dimensional “gas distribution plate”; 30/31/33; Figure 4A and the associated gas injection holes (32; Figure 4A; [0050]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Unmixed process gas injection in zones and ratio control include US 8551890 B2; US 20110256729 A1; US 20130196078 A1; US 20160068953 A1; US 20140127404 A1; US 20140373783 A1
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Rudy Zervigon whose telephone number is (571) 272- 1442. The examiner can normally be reached on a Monday through Thursday schedule from 8am through 6pm EST. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Any Inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Chemical and Materials Engineering art unit receptionist at (571) 272-1700. If the examiner cannot be reached please contact the examiner's supervisor, Parviz Hassanzadeh, at (571) 272- 1435.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/Rudy Zervigon/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Prosecution Insights